prasun from ajay sukla blog it is seen that infrastructure along the north-east and the eastern border is horrible there is no road link,rail link and pretty clumsy airfield just activated that not even operate fully what is GOI doing to pug these stop gaps?

can you give me a link that covers the development which is happening or plans for development that will occur in future days.

To Anon@5:01PM: There were murmers about it since early this year and I sincerely hope it turns out to be true. In fact, what the MoD should have done long ago was to formalise an industrial partnership between BAE Systems and Cochin Shipyard Ltd (CSL) under which BAE Systems's Future Carrier could have been customised to suit the Indian Navy's QRs as the IAC, following which CSL could then have proceeded with fabricating up to two units of the IAC. In my view, the existing 37,000-tonne IAC is not of the optimum size and the least the Indian Navy could have done was to design an IAC with dimensions similar to INS Vikramaditya.

To Anon@12:43AM: Flight-tests of the ZDK-03 (not KJ-200 or KJ-2000)will begin next year, with deliveries beginning in late 2011. The first Saab 2000 AEW & C is due for delivery towards the end of this month.

To Anon@1:09AM: The IL-78MKP will be powered by D-30K engines and become operational before next March. It is coming from Ukraine.

To Anon@8:28AM: Why have you reached such a conclusion? If you were to believe all that Pakistan's PM and Minister of Interior have been saying of late about India's handiwork in Baluchistan and FATA, then by all means both RAW and the military Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA, the real counterpart of the ISI) have been doing bloody good!

Prasun K Sengupta said...To Anon@12:43AM: Flight-tests of the ZDK-03 (not KJ-200 or KJ-2000)will begin next year, with deliveries beginning in late 2011. The first Saab 2000 AEW & C is due for delivery towards the end of this month.

To Anon@8:41AM: With respect to your query, you will the following weblinks quite insightful:

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262720

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262721

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262748

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262750

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262752

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262762

And finally, the most level-headed and pragmnatic analysis of Sino-Indian relations in a historical context that I've come across thus far can be read here:http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262753

To Anon@9:05AM: The ZDK-03 AEW & CS was described by the former CAS of PAF in 2008 as being a Y-8 platform housing the same AESA radar array and on-board avionics as that of the KJ-200. However, the PAF has mandated some modifications and enhancements like reduction of vibration and installation of active cancellation avionics. The ZDK-03 will not have any aerial refuelling probes. Check up by previous blog-posting where you will find additional data on the ZDK-03 and FC-20 M-MRCA.

To Anon@9:15AM: Evaluations of ALL on-board mission avionics and live-firing of weapon systems of EVERY M-MRCA contender will be done abroad in the countries hosting the IAF evaluation teams.

To Anon@9:23AM: No, not the F-35 JSF, but the MiG-29Ks, since the Indian Navy has already finalised plans for raising three combat squadrons centered around the MiG-29K (16 + 29 aircraft). Although the Navy has 'verbally' been gung-ho about the Tejas over the years, as yet there has been no official sanction from any quarter within the MoD for raising any squadron for operating the Tejas M-MRCA.

To Anon@9:37AM: Of course, since the ODL is of the software-defined type.

To Austin: The detection range of 120km for GCI-type defensive counter-air operations is deemed sufficient, and when it comes to for offensive air superiority operations with the support of A-50I PHALCON-type AEW & C platforms, the task of airborne battle management is no longer that of the MiG-29 aircrew, as the tactical air situation picture (far exceeding the detection range of the Zhuk-M2E) will be made available to all airborne MiG-29s by the A-50I. Consequently, BVR firing quality data too will be available long before the Zhuk-M2E's services are reqd. With regard to the RVV-SD's 110km range, it is fine on paper only, as the altitude at which air combat takes place will have to be factored in. The no of underwing pylons will remain the same as that on the existing MiG-29B-12s (the IAF never had the MiG-29A). But the wingroots and vertical tailfins will house AESA-based active jammers (supplied by Italy's Elettronica) for jamming the data links and active radars of hostile BVRAAMs. WRT MiG-29SE versus F-16C close combat capability analysis, I have some 20 graphic presentations prepared as far back as 1991 by General Dynamics and will upload them in due course. Should serve as a healthy frame of reference. By the way, sometime in 1994 I had collected an illustrated brochure of NAL in which a photo showed a scale-model of an F-16A being subjected to wind-tunnel tests! The principal problems of the original RD-33 were its higher fuel consumption, highly visible exhaust fumes, and the sheer number of fuel pumps, with the last one being one of the principal causes of fatal airborne flameouts in case maintenance procedures were not strictly adhered to. This particular problem has now been overcome on the RD-33-3/MK through incorporation of FADEC. Coupled with in-flight refuelling and a newer IRST from UOMZ, the upgraded MiG-29UPG will be more than a match for even the Block 50/52 F-16C/D.

Prasun,as usual my query is off topic Ur thoughts on US President Barak Obama saying the US goes not wish to contain China and would like to see a strong and prosperous china.why is it coming now and under what circums and what 'responsible role' is the US expecting the Chinese to play?why is the US asking the Chinese to be more active on the world stage?

if possible ur thoughts on a completely diff issue -US's worries over being excluded from(importance of these economic ties to the US) a FTA in Asia pacific and should India join it and be more active on the world affairs or should we wait until we grow further

To Anon@10:25AM: This fella Obama does not need to contain China because he and his predecessor have already made China beholden to the US$ for the next 50 years at least. All this talk of an indebted US living off China's credits is utter rubbish since China knows only too well that its economy too will go bust were the US economy to be admitted to the intensive care unit! Obama is saying all this just to seek China's and Japan's support for eliminating North Korea's demonstrated WMD capabilities. But time will likely prove that his present assumptions are wrong, since China will do as little as possible to restrain North Korea (thereby preventing Korean reunification and continuing to maintain pressure on Japan). Also, don't expect any major changes in the US' national security paradigm, especially from this fella Obama. This guy has been in denial over his roots from Day 1 of his political career. How can be ever claim to be an African-American when he is of mixed blood (his wife-beating dad being of Negroid stock and his mum being a Caucasian)? By claiming to be African-American he is living a life of self-denial. Now he is under even greater pressure to deliver as he must be the first ever such person to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize IN LIEU of producing any result that makes him deserve the award. So what does he do and what are his options under the so-called 'call to action'? The option he has chosen is to pursue the path of global nuclear disarmament (mind you, no one is even talking about WMD elimination, such are his double standards!). And how does he do it? By forcing the discredited NPT down everyone's throats, instead of demonstrating statesmanship by redrafting the NPT to reflect post-Cold War realities, or by disbanding NATO and coming up with a new trans-Atlantic security paradigm that includes Russia. You can read more about Obama's NPT-related strategems at: http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?262835

To Faris: The Igla Igla-1, Anza Mk1 and Mk2 are ineffective against UAVs under hot-and-humid conditions. But the Igla-S is effective provided the UAV can be detected visually by a new-generation thermal imager mounted on the missile launcher. The Anza Mk1 is a licence-built QW-1 and the Anza Mk2 is a licence-built QW-2 MANPADS from CPMIEC. The Baktar Shikan is the licence-built Red Arrow, which in turn is a fatter and beefed-up Milan-2 using a tripod-mounted launcher similar in design to that for the TOW. The NORINCO-built look-alike of the TOW is the HJ-9A, and the Iran-built look-alike is called Toophan, and the DENEL-built look-alike is the Ingwe.

In your previous blog-posting you have written that the GoI has still not funded the development of CFTs on the Tejas Mk2 M-MRCA.How will then there will be CFTs on the Tejas?

Can the DASH-3 HMD replace the HUD/Head-Down-Displays on the Tejas as i have read somewhere that future HMDs can replace the Displays on the cocckpit in the aircraft?

You have written n your previous blog-posting that the IRST sensors for the Tejas Mk2 M-MRCA will be imported.Can you please tell what IRST sensors will go on the Tejas?How good it will be?Are there any chance of INDIGENOUSLY developed IRST sensors and AESA radars to go on-board the Tejas i.e. Tejas Mk3 onwards.

Prasun I agree on the BVR part and yes the range possibly corresponds to ballistic range under ideal conditions , but thats the case for any BVR missile , I guess all OEM wants to but the best numbers out there.

Since IAF will be changing its engine to RD-33 series 3 as part of the UPG , can we expect better fuel consumption and consequently more time in air for 29UPG ?

Do they plan to increase the internal fuel capacity as part of the upgrade ?

What have weapons load , are they bound to increase with the 29UPG , I believe the original ( Mig-29B-12 ) could carry no more than 3 T of weapons.

Considering they are being converted from a air superiority fighter to a multirole fighter higher load will be better ?

Prasun how did the Indian Mig-29B-12 differed from the Mig-29A or the one Warsaw operated at that time ?

Were we forced into buying the Mig-29 as I read that the large M2K order and subsequent lic prod was not something Soviet was happy with and they scuttled the M2K lic prod by offering Mig-29 with lic prod.

To Austin: Here are the additional clarifications that you had sought:1) I had mistakenly stated earlier that there will be six underwing hardpoints on the MiG-29UPG. Actually, it is eight (four under each wing), and a total of nine hardpoints with 13 store stations. I will upload the weapons loading configuration slide, plus another slide detailing the on-board equipment in this posting later tonight. 2) The maximum external load will be 5.5 tons (12,100lb)3) The aircraft's service ceiling is 17,500 metres (57,400 feet) while the rate of climb will be 305 metres/second (984 feet/second).4) The powerplant's exact designation is RD-33 Series 3M with a TTSL of 4,000 hours. The airframe's TTSL is 6,000 hours. 5) Interception of airborne targets will take place at altitudes between 20 metres (66 feet) and 27,000 metres (88,580 feet) at a maximum speed of 1,458 Knots. Maximum service range without 3 fuel drop-tanks will be 1,600km (973nm). 6) On-board systems of non-Russia origin will include the VOR/ILS/MKR unit, TACAN, Comms suite, operational data link, RWR, active jamming pod and internal jammer, IFF and ATC transponder, laser designation pod, and the video recording system.Now, coming to the MiG-29A/MiG-29B-12 issue, as you are aware, the Ruskies never used the NATO-style variant designations like A/B/C/D. Instead, the IAF MiG-29s were delivered in three batches, with the first batch being called Bort 12. These had a rather simple on-board fire-control system only for air superiority and could detect, track and engage only 1 aircraft at a time. This was followed by Bort 13 with the Topaz radar which could track four targets and engage one of them. The MiG-29UPG will conform to Bort 41 standards (same as that of the MiG-29K) in terms of on-board systems and open-architecture avionics suite. The only thing missing will be the fly-by-wire flight control system, which is fine and acceptable. Only the issue of HMD is to be worked out and in all probability will be the same as that for the MiG-29K, i.e. TopOwl from THALES (which is also due to be qualified in the near future on the Su-30MKI as well).

Continued from above.....Regarding the MiG-29 licenced-production, it was neither offered nor sought, but what the Soviets did offer was the licenced-production of the MiG 1.44 (resembling the EF-2000 Eurofighter), or the MiG-35 as it was then also referred to. But way back, by 1979 itself, Dassault Aviation was offering to both India and Saudi Arabia the combination of the single-engined Mirage 2000 and twin-engined Mirage 4000. After the Saudies committed to the F-15C/D in the early 1980s and were proceeding to acquire the Tornado ADV/IDS, the French mounted a heavy marketing campaign within India to push the Mirage 2000/Mirage 4000 package and were competing against the rival Soviet offer of MiG-23MF, MiG-23BN, MiG-25R, MiG-27M (with licenced-production), the MiG-29B-12), and the I.44/MiG-35 licenced-production. It was this intense marketing rivalry that resulted in the infamous Larkins Brothers spy scandal. In all, quite a messy affair. At the end of the day the Soviets won as they in the final stages (between 1982 and 1986) sweetened their offer by including the offer to help India with Project ATV (for both SSGNs and SSBNs), and the rest, as you know, is history.

To Anon@4.19PM: The CFDs were designed by the early 1990s but were not fabricated nor was any wind-tunnel testing done. They are due for re-designing to now go on-board the enlarged Tejas Mk2 fuselage, on which work will begin only after engine selection is done. Once the enlarged Tejas Mk2’s wind-tunnel tests are completed, only then will fuselage fabrication begin. As all this takes time, the best option is to opt for the engine that requires the least amount of internal engine-bay redesign (thereby reducing the redesign effort to a large extent) and if that is the case, then the F4140GE-400 is a sure winner. Only after the Tejas Mk2’s airframe design has been completed (featuring a redesigned air intake, large wings and a forward-section avionics bay offering more internal volume) will it be possible to decide on the type of on-board IRST systems for fitment. Now, considering the fact that UOMZ’s IRSTs are already in service in large numbers with the IAF and now with the Indian Navy as well, it makes sense to stick to UOMZ-built IRST sensors for the Tejas Mk2 as well. (from a product-support standpoint). The IRST will turn will have to be integrated with the Dash 3 HMD and the on-board navigation-and-attack avionics suite that will include the EL/M-2052 AESA-based radar. Let’s not talk about the Tejas Mk3 now as it is unlikely to emerge at all. Let us await the rollout of the Tejas Mk2, which ADA has promised within 36 months after contract signature (i.e. 2013).

we gave BOFORS money for technology transfer for making howitzer but after the corruption scandal never made them now the case is over and india and bofors signed a MOU can we now get that amount of money less if we but new bofors artillery like the ARCHER which is competing in wheeled artillery tender?can you please write a blog post detailing all the 5 artillery tender and the competitors.thank you

There was news tht The Bofors Dynamics has signed MoU with the Indian government wht do u make of this?Can the Artillary upg of IA finally begin in near future?If so then wht is ur take on the Bofors Archer system?It weighs around 30 tonnes i think? How will it affect its mobility as far as airborne transport is considered?

If the GE F-414-400 is selected then F-18 looks like a sure winner too but will the Engine comonality hav any effect on the Offsets offered?

The IAF seems to be keen on building its AD network based on Akash & the MRSAM.It also seems tht the IAF may ask formally for a longer ranged version of Akash wht is ur take on this?How will such developement(if it take place) affect the MRSAM aquisition?

The recent report of British MoD's decision to indicate a possibli sale of one of contracted CVF's looks like hogwash to me If it goes through It will leave UK with only one carrier.However the possibility of UK aiding IN to design a 65000 tonne carrier based on CVF cannot be denied.Wht is ur take on this?

prasunin india from rfi-rfp-trail-contract sign take 3-4 years why is it so lengthy can't it be done in 1 year?we have a huge modernization plan but each and every of them are in paper or in rfi why is our procurement so slow like snail?

To Anon@5:33AM: Whoah! What brought you to such conclusions? The EL/M-2032 has been on the 10 upgraded Jaguar IMs since the late 1990s and has been followed by the six FRS Mk51 upgraded Sea Harriers. The Tejas Mk1 and Mk2 M-MRCAs will have the EL/M-2052. Induction of the first operational Tejas Mk1 is slated for 2012 while rollout of the first tejas Mk2 prototype is scheduled for 2013. The Tejas will be able to know about the exact position of any airborne platform while it is still 300km away and while its on-board radar is inoperative. How? Thanks to the operational data link that enables the A-50I PHALCON to pass on the tactical air situation picture on to the Tejas, Su-30MKI, MiG-29UPG, etc.

To Anon@6:18AM: If the MoU is with Saab-Bofors Dynamics (whose product range can be viewed at: http://www.saabgroup.com/en/ProductsServices/BusinessUnit/saab_bofors_dynamics.htm) then the MoU has nothing to do with field artillery howitzers. Firstly, an MoU tantamounts to nothing, as no money changes hands and no contract is inked. The MoU is therefore only an intention to cooperate in areas of potential interest like the IRIS-T air combat missile, or Strix 120mm guided-mortar round. In any case, Saab-Bofors Dynamics already has existing licencing arrangements with OFB for licence-producing various rocket-propelled rounds for the Carl Gustav. The former Bofors AB business unit making the FH-77B or ARCHER is now 100% owned by BAE Systems. As for other reference materials on the Indian Army's field artillery rationalisation plan (FARP), I've already written extensively about it at:http://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2008/10/farcical-trials.htmlandhttp://trishulgroup.blogspot.com/2009/10/ottavio-quattrocchis-lasting-gift-to.html

To Anon@6:50AM: Beats me. Attitude problems, perhaps?

To Anon@6:54AM: The maximum period from issuing of RFIs to contract signature should not exceed three years. The problem lies within the Finance Depts attached to every Ministry in India. The Babus in these depts are extremely vary of taking responsibility for decisions made due to their fears about covert enquiries being launched by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). What India's MoD needs is its own integral counter-intelligence branch that keeps tabs solely on business malpractices resorted to by agents and middlemen who for the most part (not always) resort to rumour-mongering about corruption and pass on such tit-bits to the CVC, especially if their principals have lost a contract bid.

To Nava: Yes, they did try, gave up that option earlier this year as it was realised that reconfiguring the Tejas Mk2' navigation-and-attack system at a time when the EL/M-2052 and Dash 3 had already been selected for the Tejas Mk1, was not an achievable option. Plus, the EL/M-2052's volume is lesser than that of the Caesar, which has been designed from the outside for the Eurofighter EF-2000 (just as the RBE2 has been for the Rafale and the Zhuk-AE for the MiG-35), and is therefore not suitable for 'drop in' installation as is the case with scalable radars like the EL/M-2052 and SABR and RACR.

To Anon@6:59AM: Design, development and flight qualification of a combat aircraft's navigation-and-attack system (NAS) is as complex a task as developing the fly-by-wire flight control system. The operating software's environment has to be created and finalised, following which the software-driven avionics LRUs have to be integrated with the mission computer, following which the overall mission software has to be written, tested and validated. This is a time-consuming process, as the risk management factor also has to weigh in when trying out the mission software in an engineering simulator. That's why the Tejas Mk1's LSP-3 and PV-5 have yet to take to the skies.

To Anon@8:35AM: That's right. The fault does not lie with Bofors AB or BAE Systems as it was the OFB that breached the contract by not implementing all the terms of the contract. By right, it should be BAE Systems that should be suing the OFB and MoD for contract violation.

What about Indian procurement of active protection systems? You reported about that in the past, but I seriously doubted the veracity of your statements (you claimed that a Swedish system was selected for the T-90) due to a contradiction of you by a leading (Israeli) expert...

Prasun, thnx for ur previous replywhat was this talk about an Asian Nato by the republicans during the 2008 elections in the US?does is there a possibility? will india forgo her traditional stance of Non alignment?and accept foreign forces in her country to counter the big brother to our north?will it happen by a US initiative or smaller vulnerale countries getting together and the US joining this hypohtetical grouping and expanding it?who could be the founding mem&who are likely not to be participating in it?

You are claiming that EL-M/2052 has been selected for the LCA Mk-1. So, what does this mean for the indigenous MMR? During AI-2009, it was said that LCA-Mk-1 will have a hybrid MMR-EL-M/2032 with A2A modes of MMR and A2G/A2S modes of the 2032. Is this info false? Also, if Mk-1 will have 2052 then why is it taking so long for us to procure it and integrate with the next LSPs? Also, I heard that LRDE is developing an indigenous AESA. Is it true? It shouldn't be difficult task considering that CABS has achieved significant breakthroughs in developing indigenous AEW&C.Finally, in one of your posts you claim that the N-LCA will be on par with the Mig-29k. Can you explain how? N-LCA may have an edge over its Rusky counterpart in avionics and radar but the Mig will still hold sway when it comes to weapons pay load, fuel capacity, endurance, range etc.

To Nava: Pray, what did this leading Israeli expert state to contradict my 'claims'?

To Anon@9:16AM: India non-aligned? India gave up all its pretences to non-alignment in the mid-1950s itself when accepted US assistance in setting up joint India-US intelligence facilities in Charbatia and Karnal to monitor Chinese nuclear tests, readily accepted US special operations advisers on her soil to train the Tibetan Khampas (way before the Dalai Lama arrived in India), and after October 1962 when it wholeheartedly welcomed US military aid after the Sino-India border conflict. In my view, India was never non-aligned. It only spoke about it in idealistic terms while at the same time it indulged in fundemental violations of Panchsheel (five principals of peaceful co-existence) by militarily supporting the Tibetan independence movement throughout the 1950s. These are not new revelations as such. Instead, I'm only repeating some truths and facts that have already been revealed and admitted to by former Indian spymasters.

All your articles are excellent articles and information. Thank you very much.

In your previous article on PAF FC-20, you replied to one reader's comment as "To me therefore, announcement of this deal is a significant and high-profile snub by both Beijing and Islamabad to Washington DC, the implications of which are enormous and far-reaching."

What do you mean by this? What are the "enormous and far-reaching implications"? Does that mean Pakistan is ditching US for China? And China is telling US to f*** off?

By purchasing these sophisticated fighters with BVRAAM and ZDK-03 by PAF will turn the balance of air-superiority in favor of Pakistan wrt to IAF? Do you think, India is again the loser?

Among other things, he claimed that at the time that you stated that SAAB's LEDS system had been selected, the competitive evaluation had barely begun. Also, he asserted that the contenders you listed were not the real contenders.

It's all coming back to me, in no small measure due to a timely google search. You claimed that the contenders were: Israel Military Industries, RAFAEL, BAE Systems, Raytheon, Rosoboronexport, Saab, and Germany’s IBD Deisenroth Engineering.He claimed that in fact the contenders ARE: IMI, RAFAEL, Zaslon (this is the system's name, I don't remember which company manufactures it) , Rosoboronexport, SAAB.

To Anon@9:20AM: Both I and THE HINDU newspaper have 'claimed' that the EL-M/2052 has been selected for the Tejas Mk1. So, what does this mean for the indigenous MMR? Well, it will go into oblivion and suffer the same fate as the Trishul SHORADS. I don;t know who exactly stated during AI-2009 that LCA Mk1 will have a hybrid MMR-EL-M/2032 with A2A modes of MMR and A2G/A2S modes of the 2032. Maybe someone 'claimed' it in some other chat forum. Obviously it is false since it does not make any sense to flight-test the EL/M-2032 on a Tejas PV or LSP and install the EL/M-2052 on a production-standard Tejas Mk1. As far back as 2007 the IAF HQ had explicitly stated to newsmedia agencies in India that nothing short of an AESA-based radar will be acceptable for either the Tejas Mk1 or Mk2. So, in light of what I've stated above, you decide what will go on board the Tejas--a so-called hybrid MMR with EL/M-2032 elements, or the EL/M-2052. Why is it taking so long for us to procure it and integrate with the next LSPs? I've already explained that above. And where is the proof that CABS has achieved significant breakthroughs in developing indigenous AEW & CS? So far I've seen only scale-models and posters/brochures, and not even a full-scale mock-up of the mission management system.Finally, the N-LCA will be on par with the MiG-29K in terms of external payloads and endurance, as the N-LCA will have aerial refuelling capability (just like the MiG-29K), and will be lighter than the MiG-29K (thereby having much better fuel consumption figures than those of the MiG-29K). The only PGM the N-LCA will not be able to launch will be the Novator 3M-14AE Kalibr-A land attack cruise missile.

To Nava: Just a week before Aero India 2009 got underway at Bangalore, Saab AB had held a function in New D elhi to commemorate the official opening of its representative office there. At the function, it was officially announced that Saab had already WON two significant contracts in India: supply of LEDS for the T-90S MBT, and supply of components (from Saab Avitronics) for the IDAS suite being jointly developed by EADS and India’s Defence Avionics Research Establishment for installation on board the Dhruv ALHs destined for the IAF and Indian Army, and on board the Tejas Mk1. On the other hand, ELBIT Systems was late last year selected for designing and supplying the defensive aids suite (inclusive of the APS) for the Arjun Mk1 MBT. This development was officially announced by India’s DRDO in its official newsletter. Therefore, my dear friend, it would appear that it is ‘others’ that are making false claims or wrong assumptions.

I have read 'The Hindu' report. But, what I want to know is, are you basing your claim on that report or do you have some inside source to confirm this news? DRDO's wiki page too claims what I have stated. Both these claims contradict each other and in the absence of an assurance from an insider, neither can be taken at face value. If you are basing your claim on some inside info you have got then I l have no problem accepting your word over that of the The Hindu and other online resources.Coming back to the N-LCA vs Mig-29k issue. Th Mig-29 imo clearly has an edge over the N-LCA when it comes to number of hard points, payload capacity, internal fuel capacity, endurance, range etc. In a stand alone comparison, in the absence of force multipliers like areal refueler, it beats the N-LCA outright. Why then does the Navy want to go for N-LCA. If it is indeed expected to surpass the Mig-29k, why does the Navy want to operate it in conjunction with the Mig on IAC instead of N-LCA only. Also, considering the minuscule number of N-LCA that the Navy is planning to acquire, is it justified in investing so heavily into its development. In short, what does the Navy see in the N-LCA that the Mig can't do better?

To Anon@9:33AM: What do I mean? by this? It means Pakistan, at China's behest, is showing the middle finger to the US and saying "fuck you and your embargoes". Procurement of 70-odd FC-20s and 120 JF-17s will in no way undermine the IAF's superior airpower as the PAF acquisitions represent only a minimum baseline capability for defensive counter-air operations. Don't forget that as the FC-20s and JF-17s begin entering service, the PAF will begin retiring its Mirage IIIPs, Mirage VPs, A-5IIICs, F-7Ps and F-7PGs. One must bear this in mind. And this by no means can be interpreted as the sword of Damocles hanging over Pakistan's neck, since the IAF's offensive airpower projection capabilities are being beefed up not specifically against Pakistan, but more against China and for operations throughout the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).

What can I say... This individual (whom I do not know personally) is reportedly considered to be the world's leading authority on Active Protection Systems. He was in all likelihood present during the comparative trials. He claimed that SAAB's system is several years from completion. It is not controversial that Israel is the world leader in this field. I'm just saying- double check this.

Again, not taking things at face value, but he appears to be very confident about the progress and expects it to be launched by 2011. So, I think it is safe to assume that if LRDE does indeed have an AESA program, it will benefit from the achievements and breakthroughs of CABS. Probably, an indigenous AESA will be ready by the time Mk-2 goes into serial production. What say?

Prasun, if you haven't already seen it, I would like to draw your attention to this blog. Its by a serving Nuri pliot. I'm sure you'll fine it interesting.

http://hogwash1964.blogspot.com/

The link to this PDF file below contains an article by a USAF pilot who flew in a MiG-29NUB in 1997. He makes some interesting observations about the laser range finder and eye safety. No doubt, the IAF would have experienced the same with its Fulcrums. Wonder if the laser rangefinder on the MKMs/MKI's are eye safe...

http://www.sousaffs.org/FLarchives/FL-99Summ(2).pdf

Numerous articles over the years have made reference to the 2003 tie up between Ulan Ude and Airod and a deal that was almost signed for 10 Mil-17SHs. Is there any truth to this?

To Anon@10:19AM: If you knoew about the sheer intricacies of NAS integration you wouldn't have characterised my assertion about the EL/M-2052 as a mere 'claim'. I have clearly explained the intricacies above and it emerges from there that installing an EL/M-2032 on a prototype Tejas and installing an EL/M-2052 on a production-series Tejas does not make any sense to any NAS systems integrator and is a contradictory approach. The key thing to remember is that for these radars DO NOT employ a common environmental control system (ECS), but each has its own unique ECS configuration. Consequently, there's no way two different ECS will be developed at great cost and greatly increased man-hours of R & D effort for two types of airborne radars when, in the end, it will be only one ECS to cater to only one type of radar that will go on the production-series Tejas, i.e. EL/M-2052. To top it all, (and I'm repeating this again and again) the IAF had as far back as 2007 had publicly stated its MANDATORY requirement for an AESA-based multi-mode radar on board the production-series Tejas (both Mk1 and Mk2). So, from where are all these claims emerging about the EL/M-2032? Not only does it sound totally wrong and unviable both from the R & D and operational standpoints, but it goes against the very logic of developing a definitive production-standard NAS. If you still derive a satisfactory conclusions about the radar's selection, then there's more I can or will be able to add except to refer you to the NAS systems integrators at ADA.Now, comparing the N-LCA to the MiG-29K, I beg to differ with you regarding the comparative performance parameters of the two aircraft and I've seen the Navy's in-house operations analysis that have validated the N-LCA's performance competitiveness vis-a-vis the MiG-29K. Add to that the far lesser through-life support costs of the N-LCA and you get an aircraft that becomes financially more viable. But in terms of overall procurement costs, it does not make any sense for the Navy to go for a mixed fleet of N-LCA and MiG-29K. And having already committed firmly to 16 + 29 MiG-29K/KUBs, the Navy ought to stick to this fleet instead of diversifying by opting for the N-LCA, unless the Navy commits to the financially viable breakeven figure of 65 N-LCAs.

To Nava: Even if I were to check it 100 times the conclusion I stated above would be the same, since questioning it would tantamount to say that Saab AB was openly lying at an event attended by not only newsmedia, but also senior Indian MoD officials. As to who are the market leaders in the APS arena, this again is a variable claim. For instance, way back in 1988 in Singapore during a defence expo, I came across a US company called Conventional Munition Systems (CMS) that was displaying its ERA tiles for MBTs. One of the CMS officials then had told me it was the CMS-built ERA tiles that were first installed on the IDF-Army's M-60s (of OP Peace for Galilee fame), long before RAFAEL began producing such ERA tiles.

To Anon@10:31AM: Thanks for the links. However, what the CABS folks will not divulge is exactly how they they are accessing all ECS-related and mission management system-related design and installation data from Brazil's Embraer. Which means 50% of the work has already been done and there's no need to re-invent the wheel. The contract inked with Embraer for sourcing the EMB-145airborne platforms clearly contains all these technical data-sharing clauses. As for the core technology competencies for fabricating the T/R modules for the airspace surveillance radar, these already started arriving at LRDE, Astra Microwave etc by the late 1990s from ELTA Systems, thanks to the ELM-2080 Green Pine LRTR radar project. And the AMLCD displays for the on-board multifunction consoles will be sourced from Belgium's BARCO, just as they were for the A-50I PHALCON.

Alright then I l give it you. LCA Mk-1 will have EL-M/2052 as per Prasun K Sengupta. About N-LCA, I can not understand the logic behind operating two aircrafts from the same carrier when they are equal in capabilities. Obviously, if the N-LCA surpasses the Mig-29k, then what drove the Navy to commit for additional Migs? Why do they want to take the economically prohibitive route of operating two fighters. If indeed the N-LCA is that good then they should acquire more of them to at least get some RoI or to break even. imo going for the Mig will lead to a net loss. But, then again the only explanation for this could be that Navy does not have enough confidence in the N-LCA and wants to play it safe.

Thanks for your take on the AEW&C project. So, do you think LRDE has sufficient expertise and know how to undertake an AESA project for LCA and roll it out in a realistic time frame of say 2012-2013? If I am not wrong, there was a news report that claimed Phazotron was ready to collaborate with us in the development of an indigenous AESA. Do you think we should take that route? Especially, if they are ready to keep it exclusive of the MMRCA deal? obviously, if Mk-1 is going for the 2052 then we need something better for the Mk-2! Don't you think?

To Faris: Thanks for the weblinks. The IRST sensor's built-in laser rangefinder is employed and that too rarely for tail-chase engagements, not for frontal head-on engagements. During LIMA 2001 the MoU was inked between Ulan-Ude Aviation and NADI (not AIROD) for procuring 10 Mi-171s for the Army Aviation Corps. But contract signature could not proceed as MINDEF objected to the 80% mark-up proposed by the Mi-171's local agent! Separately, at the same time, a contract was inked foe the purchase of four Mi-171s (with the same mark-ups!) for the PDRM. But at LIMA 2005 I saw those four Mi-171s in BOMBA colours as the PDRM had refused to accept them (since the Mi-171s were not cmpliant with DCA regulations, and all PDRM have to mandatorily comply with DCA regulations and be placed under 9M commercial aircraft registry) and consequently these four Mi-171s (just like the two earlier Mi-17s from Kazan) were dumped with the BOMBA under 'M' military registration. What a farce! Maybe Tun Mahathir could throw more light on this 'deal' just as he could on the PKFZ fiasco. But of course he can feign ignorance or memory loss, or to use V K Lingam's logic, say: the decision should have been mine and mine only, it appears to be mine, but in reality it wasn't mine (LoL!!!)

To Anon@10:49AM: I have absolutely no idea. But I'm sure when they do happen LIVEFIST or BROADSWORD will be the first ones to publish the dates and photos. I only dabble in giving 'background' info on these programmes, instead of blurting out 'Breaking' or 'Exclusive headline news snippets, as you well might have guessed by now.

To Anon@10:51AM: Whoah! You've already come to know that the Mistral LPD has been selected by the Indian Navy? Because the previous Navy Chief had on December 4 last year said that selection from a list of contenders will be made only by 2012 and procurements will get underway between 2013 and 2017 (the next five-year defence plan). Regarding MCMVs, Goa Shipyard Ltd has already had an industrial partnership tie-up with Italy's Intermarine for quite some time now, but it is quite low in the list of procurement priorities for the Navy.

"Ur thoughts on US President Barak Obama saying the US goes not wish to contain China and would like to see a strong and prosperous china.why is it coming now and under what circums and what 'responsible role' is the US expecting the Chinese to play?why is the US asking the Chinese to be more active on the world stage?"

prasun is ARJUN MK2 project real,is there any prototype in making,when will it roll out and will ARJUN MK1 and ARJUN MK2 active protection system made by ELBIT will have hard kill missile and soft kill jammers?

To Anon@11:29AM: The US wants to constructively engage the PRC for one very pragmatic reason: all the money made by the PRC by keeping the value of the Yuan artificially low over the past two decades has led to the PRC having an enormous balance of trade surplus with both North America and the EU--this has got to be recovered back one way or another, and what better way than to address the trade imbalances and make China contribute more funds to the IMF and World Bank. Don't ever think for a moment that the trillion dollar forex reserves are for permanent keeps. Countries like Taiwan have more than US$3.5 trillion stashed away in the top 10 Japanese banks (courtesy of the late Chiang kai-shek and the Kuomintang) and until these funds are controlled by the US and Taiwan (they have to be as they are all US$ denominated), Japan economically will have no choice but to fall in line, leaving all its left-leaning rhetoric aside. It is not India that has been 'constantly' clamouring' for a NATO-style regional security set-up, but the US, Australia, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore and India and that's what gave birth to the East Asia Summits, which of course the PRC does not like as it was excluded from the start as a pro tem member. It is called 'the coalition of the willing'. As for Australia, the PRC needs Australia's minerals more than Australia needs the PRC. In any case, the Australian economy, unlike that of the PRC, is not a totally export-driven economy. As for Vietnam-India bilateral ties, India will never feel the need to entice Hanoi with either money or weapon spares supplies. Although an uneasy calm prevails along the demarcated China-Vietnam land border, the maritime boundaries in the South China Sea (containing lucrative hydrocarbon deposits) have yet to be resolved. And if Vietnam feels threatened by an imbalance of military power, it will not hesitate to open the doors of Cam Ranh Bay to the US Navy and Japan's MSDF. Why else do you think over the past five years the US Navy's oceanographic survey vessels have been making extended deployments throughout the South China Sea and around Hainan island? Wake up and get real!

Nava: Please do so and revert back here ASAP. All the very best.

To Anon@11:37AM: There exists no DRDO-led project to develop the Arjun Mk2. APS includes multi-spectrum passive warning systems and both hard-kill defensive aids and soft-kill countermeasures.

To Sachin Sathe: Weapons integration is not a problem at all since the stores management system (SMS) component of the navigation-and-attack system is software defined and the weapon-specific applications software can be easily uploaded. The only other piece of hardware requiring customising is the weapons interface pylon which again is not a technological challenge as such work has been undertaken in India before. The IAF is indeed standardising on TopOwl & Dash3 HMDs. What about Russian PGMs? The weapons list slide I've uploaded above for the MiG-29UPG also applies to the Su-30MKI and hopefully the Tejas Mk1/2 as well. The ARCHER motorised 155mm/52-cal howitzer is unlikely to be considered as it cannot go on board the C-130J transport, something the Indian Army has mandated. Even if the F414-GE-400 is selected, it will not diminish the F-16IN's prospects as that aircraft's turbofan too comes from GE, unlike the PAF's F-16s which use Pratt & Whitney's F100-PW-220 series turbofans. As for the Akash, the IAF will put it to use mostly for base air defence (and that too in mountainous terrain), while the air defence of strategic military and economic installations will be taken care of by the Barak-8 and Barak-9ER. It is the Army more than the IAF that has been clamouring for a 40km-range Akash Mk2. I personally would love to see two CVFs being procured from BAE Systems. The IAC can then be modified into a LPH like the ROK Navy's Dokdo-class LPH.

To Anon@10:50AM: The designs for the SSGN were finalised in the late 1990s by the concerned Russian design bureau. The design for the definitive SSBN is still work in progress since it is entirely dependent on the DRDO's ability to design and develop the projected 8,500km-range SLBM, and going by various official statements, working on developing such a missile has not even begun. Priority is now being accorded to developing the 5,500km-range cannistered road-mobile Agni-5 MRBM. Until the design of the SLBM is finalised, it will be impossible to design the pressure hull, bulkheads and compartment housing the missile silos.

Thank you very much for your details on Tejas Mk2.Should we expect a detail Topic on Tejas Mk2 from you,about its new redesigned air-intake,large wings and EL/M 2052 radar. It will be greatly appreciative.

To Anon@1:25PM: Many thanks. Better still, I will upload the illustration showing the original CAD prepared by GE Aero Engines, later this month. That should be an eye-opener for many, and clearly reveal the air intake design's rather striking resemblance to that of the Gripen NG. It will also show what GE had proposed for the double-cranked wing design, clearly with an eye on having folding wings for the carrier-based variant. I still can't figure out why ADA turned away from such a design configuration by the early 1990s, but to its own detriment.

The F414-EPE has been offered on the super hornets for the MMRCA. As the time frame for the delivery is around 2013 could it be that they have offered the same engine for Tejas Mk2 as it will also fly during the same period. What do you think?

Considering the capabilities of MiG-29K/KUBs,if they are further upgraded, just like the to-be-upgraded Sukhois, with AESA radars, MIL-1773 STD databus, fly-by-light FCS, stealthy composite airframe with internal weapons and conformal AESA-arrays, I think it will beat the F/A-18 Super Hornets and even the JSF.What do you say?

Will the MiG-29K/KUBs be upgraded in near future with such capabilities?

To Anon@1:16AM: Regarding the news item you've posted, it does not state anywhere if the aircraft is a new-build one or an existing one that is being modified and converted into an aerial refuelling tanker. But what is significant is the use of the term IL-78, because what is now available from Ukraine are only IL-76MD cargo transport aircraft. Furthermore, Ukraine only has MRO facilities for the IL-76, not modification or manufacturing facilities.

Therefore, what Pakistan has done is order the IL-78 airframes and PS-90A engines from Uzbekistan's TAPO and these aircraft will then be flown to Ukraine, where they will be fitted with aerial refuelling pods and the internal fuel tanks that are now stocked up in Ukraine since the days of the USSR.

The PAF is perfectly aware of the fact that in another two years Ukrainian companies and TAPO will not be able to supply or service new-build IL-76s and IL-78s and A-50Es as Russia is going to commission a new assembly line for these aircraft types at Voronez, and claim all IPRs for the IL-76 family of aircraft. Presently, TAPO only builds the airframe and undertakes final assembly, with the engines and avionics and accessories all being sourced from Russia. Therefore, the PAF will have to depend on the Russians for through-life product support for its IL-78MKPs. And this is exactly what the present Russian Ambassador to India confirmed last August in an interveiw to FORCE magazine when he said that eventually India will have to learn to live with the prospect of a Pakistan being armed with some weapons of Russian origin. I guess he was also referring to the RD-93 turbofans for the JF-17s and AL-31FN turbofans for the FC-20 M-MRCAs that will be inducted by the PAF in future.

prasun it is really frustrating everyday there is news that some soldier is killed from seize fire violation across the paki border and loc what can india do teach those pakis a lesson and stop this violation other than complain to international arena and lodging complain in flag meeting

prasun all developed countries test their strategic missile more than 10 times in a span of <5 years to make them operational but we take 5 years to make a strategic missile operational by testing it 3-4 times and after induction in armed forces they still fail their acceptance test like the AGNI 2 test in may

why don't we test more frequently and rectify all the glitches between 5 years and test a missile more than 10 times to make it operational why do ye test so lessothers feel that our missile force is bluff

prasun then the ARIHANT class SSBN can only carry 750km SAGARKA as you said that there is no start of the 8500km slbm project and it is optimized to carry sagarika by which its hull and other structures are made that 750km range is very lessthe next coming batch of 2 ARIHANTS will they carry sagarika or 8500km slbm?if the design of SSGN is finalized in 1990 so why didn't IN build the SSGN first and later go for the SSBN ?may be priority but now ARIHANT is out can we see a ssgn building soon?

To Anon@7:10PM: The MiG-29K/KUBs will no doubt be subjected to mid-life upgrades within the next decade. There's no need to upgrade to the fly-by-light flight control system since upgrading to MIL-STD-1553B Hyper-standard alone with produce dramatic results. And of course Phazotron JSC will be able to replace the Zhuk-M1E with the Zhuk-AE as a drop-in installation. Even at this point the MiG-29K, in terms of BVR combat capabilities and waging multi-role air campaigns, is more than a match for the F-16C/D.

To Anon@7:55PM: Everything now depends on the engine selection process's outcome. If the GE-built F414 is selected, then work on designing and fabricating the Tejas Mk2 will of course be accelerated with far fewer risks. And now that ADA has already roped in EADS to help with validation of the Tejas Mk2 flight control system's performance, it is now entirely possible that the first Tejas Mk2 would be inducted into service by 2015. It would be premature to compare the FC-20 with the Tejas Mk2 simply because there's a lot more R & D work to be done on the FC-20. For one, AESA-related systems integration work, to be undertaken by Pakistan's Kamra-based PAC with help from Selex Galileo, will be a daunting but in the end, an achievable task. In addition, it remains to be seen if China will be able to guarantee the product support for the AL-31FN turbofans. Furthermore, no one as yet can say with certainty when exactly the ZDK-03 AEW & C platforms will be operationalised as there too there are a few systems development hurdles to be overcome.

So if the GE-built F414 is selected, then minor modifications have to be done on the original CAD ,prepared by GE Aero Engineswork ,for the Tejas Mk2.Then designing and fabricating the Tejas Mk2 will of course be accelerated.Am i right?I hope the GE-built F414-EPE is selected. Do ypu have any insight to which engine will be selected?

Will the Tejas Mk2 have the MIL-STD-1553B Hyper-standard fly-by-wire flight control system?Now that ADA has roped in EADS to help with validation of the Tejas Mk2 flight control system's performance will it not be feasible to go for the MIL-1773 STD fly-by-light FCS.

You didnot answer this question-Will the Tejas Mk2 M-MRCA and the upgraded MiG-29K/KUBs have conformal AESA-arrays like the to-be-upgraded Sukhois?

From the list of hardware PAF is getting over the next few years, is the qualitative gap between IAF and PAF coming to an end? How can IAF maintain this edge in the coming decade? Especially considering that in DACT's between SU-30/SU-27 and J-10, the J-10 seems to win generally according to various chinese sources.

To Anon@12:26AM: That's very simple, really. Just return the fire by targetting some border outposts across the LoC and open fire using NTW-20 20mm anti-material rifles in a calibrated manner, thereby avoiding collateral damage/destruction and at the time time ensuring the punitive nature of retaliatory fire.

To Anon@1:17AM: That's not quite true. Developed countries started work on ballistic and cruise missiles quite early on after World War-2 and took as much as 20 years to develop robust and reliable delivery platforms and their MIRVs. Compared to that, even if India takes five or even nine years to achieve similar results, then this is no small achievement. The same goes for the production and engineering infrastructure as well, since no one can guarantee a flawless QC regime in the initial years. Considering that such infrastructure began coming up only in the late 1990s, one can now safely assume that as of now the production/engineering infrastructure has achieved a high degree of QC/QA maturity and that also accounts for the accelerated pace of flight-testing the Agni-3 and projected Agni-5 MRBMs. Whatever I've outlined above has to be subjected to an evolutionary process, and there's no such thing as technology leapfrog due to the existence of various multilateral technologiy-denial regimes.

To Anon@1:59AM: The SSGN's design was finalised in the late 1990s, not in 1990. But by then the Arihant's hull sections were already being fabricated. It was only in January 2004 that the decision was taken to proceed with hull construction of the first two SSGNs but by 2007 due to mismanagement within the Russian shipbilding yards the money India originally paid for refurbishing and upgrading the Admiral Gorshkov (INS Vikramaditya) had to be diverted to those shipyards and related ancillary hardware suppliers that were contracted for supplying various components and sub-systems for the two SSGNs. I had in fact alluded to this as far back as last May, explaining that the cost-escalation being asked by Russia WAS NOT, in fact, for INS Vikramaditya, but was instead meant for adhering to the production schedule for the two SSGNs. To the best of my knowledge, no one else has thus far even touched this subject, leave alone investigate it further! All this talk of an inflated sum of money being asked by Moscow to deliver the INS Vikramaditya is pur hogwash, and is in fact being used as the main excuse for pumping more money for the SSGN construction programme.

Continued from above....There indeed was always a dire necessity for having a technology demonstrator vessel like the Arihant, which will serve as the undersea laboratory for the DRDO to carry out R & D activities in the fields of sonar suite development, acoustic/wire-guided heavyweight torpedo development, underwater acoustic signature management/reduction efforts, validation of the nuclear propulsion system, validation of the SATCOM-based communications system, and finally the development of the 8,500km-range SLBM and its related silo (preferrably housed within the submarine's pressure hull) and launch command-and-control systems and procedures. Only after all these challenges have been overcome will construction of the operational SSBNs (three vessels are projected) get underway.

To Anon@5.05AM: Who can convincingly state that Pakistan has 90-100 n-warheads while China has 400-500 warheads? Whenever non-governmental non-proliferation agencies five out their estimates of n-arsenals they ALWAYS do it based on the amount of fissile materials (weapons-grade enriched uranium or plutonium) that any country's nuclear reactors is capable of producing. They almost never talk about the re-processing capacities of the spent fuel, and the weaponisation capabilities. To me this is a totally erroneous way of estimating a country's arsenal of n-weapons. Therefore, in my own estimate China has no more than 125 operational warheads while Pakistan has only 10 left from the original 12 that it received from China in the late 1990s.

To Anon@6:25AM: I don't have any insight into which engine will be selected for the Tejas Mk2. The Tejas Mk2 will not have the MIL-STD-1553B Hyper-standard fly-by-wire flight control system, since only Boeing thus far has developed such FCS technologies for the F-15SE. If MIL-STD-1773 fly-by-light FCS is introduced into the Tejas Mk2 it will delay the aircraft's flight certification by at least six years. Regarding conformal AESA-arrays I already addressed it very early above. The MiG-29K/KUBs already have them as active jammers and the upgraded MiG-29UPGs and Tejas Mk2 will have them as well.

To Anon@7:02AM: Yes, the qualitative gap is closing in terms of defensive counter-air warfare. And in terms of all-weather standoff strike using PGMs for effects-based operations, both the PAF and PLAAF are catching up with the IAF in a rapid manner through the induction of ALCMs like the DH-10A and Ra'ad.

Prasun, I agree with your comment on the calculations of fissile materials. However, I would note that calculations for India do take that aspect into account. Otherwise the total in terms of a fissile stockpile for India would be in the hundreds. For Pakistan they assume virtually a 100%efficiency rate of the enrichment plants and no shutdowns.

Also, it does not factor in delivery systems. China has something like 46 ICBMs and 35 IRBMs deployed at present plus a large number of SRBMs/MRBMs. To get 300+ warheads, a large chunk of those SRBMs/MRBMs would have to be nuclear armed which would deleteriously impact the flexibility of such systems.

For Pakistan to have 90-100 weapons, a large percentage of its airforce would have to be earmarked for the nuclear role as even the most optimistic calculations do not give an MRBM/IRBM force of more than 30 at present.

The truth is FAS has never forgiven India for the 1998 tests. In fact one of them went on to say that India's claims of being capable of ICBM technology were a lie (indeed he is one of the authors of the most recent report) and got highly offended when somebody innocently asked him how then did they have the technology to put a probe onto the moon!

Read it. More than anything, I was shocked by the wanton, exceedingly callous reporting. A lengthly technical discussion about the crashed Rustom aeroplane, but not a single word about its pilot, presumed to be liquidated?!

Well I for one promulgate, with no equivocation: Fuzzy Dunlop, you shall not be forgotten! (look it up)

to Prasun sir,U just mentioned about SSGN for India. If m not wrong i assume them to b built in russian yards, can u enlighten whether work has begun and if yes what wud b expected delivery dates, i presume along with vikramditya itself??

Also somwher in previous post u had mentioned nuclear submarines to b built in south India, pls give some details.

U had mentioned about 2 scorpene subs bein delayed and two others bein built at faster rate but what about the remainin two??

To Nava: It seems that the UAV that crashed was not the full-scale Rustom, but the R-1-1 proof-of-concept vehicle, whose dimensions are a length of about 3 metres and a wingspan of 1.5 metres. Apparently, after hovering over the private airstrip of Taneja Aerospace and Aviation Ltd. for a few minutes, the UAV lost direction and crashed onto an adjacent coconut farm. PS: Go easy on the reporting, for the guy who did it is only a broadcast journalist.

To Swapnil: In Russia all component manufacturing is being done for the two SSGNs and the their deliveries to the Navy's Vizag-based Shipbuilding Yard India began in 2007. Concurrently, L & T in Hazira also began supplying pre-fabricated sections of the pressure hull (after receiving the raw materials from Russia) and by early this year the situation became quite critical as all these stuff was piling up at the Shipbuilding Yard (since the Arihant was originally due to be floated last January but this was postponed to July 26 mainly due to an over-cautious DRDO which wanted to re-check the iuntegrity of the vessel's heat exchanger-related piping network). Now that the Arihant is out of the Yard, fabrication work on the first SSGN has just got underway. Now, in order to expedite the construction of the two SSGns plus the projected three SSGNs, the MoD is taking over the Vizag-based Hindustan Shipyard Ltd, which will increase the hull fabrication capacity. The Vikramaditya will be delivered by mid-2012. President Medvedev during a visit to Sevmash earlier this year has already passed a decree guaranteeing the delivery schedule.It stands to reason that when fabrication of Scorpene hull nos 3 and 4 are ahead of schedule, the fabrication schedules for nos 5 and 6 too will be brought forward.

prasun you mean to say that arihant is a technological demonstrator SSBN original SSBN are far away then what are the next batch of 2 arihants in making are they also tech demos or they are original SSBN?you mean that we are building 2 SSGN in russia are they the nerpa and the other akula we keep hearing about ?why dont we make ssgn in india like the ARIHNT?nerpa as you have said is akula3 what difference does it have with akula2 in russian navy?

There is absolutely no evidence or no official statement or leaked bravado from anyone in Pakistan to indicate that n-warhead design and warhead integration into the ballistic missiles is taking place within Pakistan. All that one has heard so far are disclosures by Dr A Q Khan about receiving fissile materials from China, and about domestic assembly of ballistic missiles by the NESCOM and NDC from Dr Samar Mubarak Mand. If at all the n-warhead designs were indigenous then by now there would have been for sure some kind of publicity-seeking disclosures from NESCOM and PINSTECH. No wonder the US has to date been unable to gain access to Pakistan's n-warhead designs, because if they could be accessed, they would clearly display the 'Made in PRC' tag. And the PRC of course would never allow this to happen, and the only way to ensure that this will never happen is to have total control over them. Therefore, I'm not surprised at all by the fact that it is China, and not Pakistan, that retains ownership and operational control of these n-warheads, albeit on Pakistani soil.

The operational Indian SSGNs will have a displacement not exceeding 5,000 tonnes. The Akula-3 comes in the 10,000-tonne category. No one is building the SSGNs destined for India in Russia. Component and sub-systems manufacturing is done in Russia, while the pressure hull is being fabricated by L & T. Final assembly will be done at Vizag. To lump all these three stages into one word--building--is unwise.

Your revelations about India's SSGN program is enlightening but at the same time confusing too. Can you please, for the benefit of the readers of your blog, provide a brief compendium of all the nuclear powered submarines under construction for the IN within India or elsewhere with their classification into SSN/SSGN/SSBN.Also, based on your understanding and assessment of the progress of work happening in both India and Russia, how many nuclear powered subs do you think India will posses by 2020. Also, is there any plan to operationalize the canisterized version of the 3500 km range Agni-3 for one of the SSGNs/SSBNs? If not the time line for the induction of an SSBN into IN may be too long!

Prasun daA bit off topic but why is Malaysia seeking fresh logistical support for it's SU-30 fleet from China whereas still now they were being supported/maintained by IAF technicians. Is it something to do with geopolitical situation or are they not happy with Indian support ?

Another request:Can you make out a detailed comparison of present and future Artillery Systems in Pakistan, India and Chinese armed forces.

you said that after arihant moved out the dumping of items from russia for the next SSGN now the work on the ssgn is moving so the next batch of arihants we are hearing about in making are they SSBN or SSGN? original SSBN are far away then what are the next batch of 2 arihants in making are they also tech demos or they are original SSBN? why dont we make 5000 tons ssgn in india like the ARIHNT since SSBN tech demo is out?

Like Soutik, I'm puzzled as to what assistance the PLAAF can possibly provide the RMAF with regards to mantainance? The MKM is based on the MKI and both are totally different from China's MKK's. Who is providing the RMAF with assistance in developing an air combat training syllabus and doctrine for it's MKM's?

It seems a report in a British daily has confirmed that the Batch 2 Lekiu is 'dead in the water'. Like you previously suggested, the smart thing now will be for the Malaysian government to seek a Korean shipyard to build the Lekius.

What is the reason that the Stinger is operated by very few non-NATO countries, is it solely due to strict US export controls or its price tag?. Even Australia, who could have got it if it wanted, decided on the RBS-70.

By the way, the RMN has confirmed that the MM-38s on the Perdana and Handalan FACs will be retired, officially to 'cut costs'. Didn't a Pakistani company a few years ago receive a contract to re-life the MM-38s?

We can blame our own Indians for this debacle. Today, India, Brazil and South Africa have the largest rare-earth mineral deposit in the whole world. India's rare earth mineral (REM) deposit is expected to last another 200-400 years. Most of these mineral deposits are on the seashores of Kerala and TN. The REM from India is of very high quality.

What India is doing with this "super gold"- a gift given by God? Nothing! If you go to the Rare-earth processing companies around Kerala, you will see folks playing cards, computer games, relieving themselves by watching pornos, etc. The production of rare earth elements haven''t been increased in the last 2 decades. The technology used in processing these ores dated to 50s-60s.

Thanks to the Communist unions, most of the companies have lay off and strikes and thus the production has plummeted in 90s. Then, there was a serious thinking of selling these minerals to a private company so that it will start the processing and production of Rare Earth elements. But that formula was also rejected by our own great Reds and Palm-wallas!

Now the Govt of Kerala is selling the minerals to Chinese merchants. What an irony!

Now whom can we blame? China knows very well that India's REM production is in nascent state, needs a lot of investment to start a profit making industry. Now what China is doing is, it cuts the export of rare earth elements and forcing many high tech companies having high technology to process the minerals to invest in China, so that people of China get the job, Govt of China will get the money by exporting high grade rare earth elements.

Here is another story of India's sad governmental policy. India has one of the largest deposits of Beryllium minerals, an essential element in nuclear reactors as neutron capture. In 80s and 90s, India used to sell Beryllium (Be) ores to Japan for paltry sum. Japan produce 99% 'Be' element from the ores, and then export it to other countries including US. Then US makes 99.9999% pure 'Be' from these, and then re-export to other Nuclear countries, including India. India purchase this ultra-pure 'Be' at an exorbitant price. Again, what an irony!

Our babus are not at all worried about the development of India. Only their aim is how to make money for them and their family. Look at *&^ Madhu Koda. Laloo is silent, it seems he is one of the beneficiary and so do the congress. CPM and CPI will shed tears for Iraqis, but not for the people of India.

Prasun,Did you read this news:China, Brazil reach five-point consensus to strengthen military exchangeshttp://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-11/17/content_12471017.htm

Shouldn't India be concerned about this? But our moron politicians are not at all worried, shameless &^%. Eunuchs are better than our politicians. China is going everywhere they feel is useful to them. My God!, new way of colonialism

prasun there is news about IAF buying C17 why are they buying c17 through FMS when it cost about 250 mil to US and according to news report we are buying them at 170 mil.why cant we buy and in fact start building ourself the an-124 with ukraine it would be a huge boost to our industry since it is not in production we can start the production get the technology and experience and compete for the heavy lifter market and export an124 cost much less than than c17 if serialy produced.an124(150 ton) can carry much heavy load than the c17(77 ton),an124 can also land on unpaved runway and has a moderate takeoff and landing distance so why to go for expensive c17 from which we can gain nothing than to go for and produce and export an124 from which we can get technology experience and export chance?

What minor modifications have to be done on the original CAD,prepared by GE Aero Engineswork ,for the Tejas Mk2 if the GE-built F414 is selected?

Why the MIL-STD-1553B Hyper-standard fly-by-wire FCS cannot be developed for the Tejas Mk2 if MIL-STD-1773 fly-by-light FCS will delay the aircraft's flight certification (by at least six yrs)? What difference will the MIL-STD-1553B Hyper-standard fly-by-wire FCS bring over the MIL-STD-1553B standard fly-by-wire FCS? Please explain.

Apart from the two SSGNs that are now being built,how many more SSGNs are going to be built?

What are the improvements in the three new Talwar-class frigates over the earlier ones apart from the BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles that will replace the 3M-54E Klub-N anti-ship missiles? Will the new ones have the Vl-shtil SAM system and the latest Kashtan-m1 CIWS (earlier ones have the Kashtan-m CIWS)?

why is it taking so long for additional Tejas LSPs as I read that lot of testing is still remaining for IOC and not enough aircrafts are available to do the testing. can you also let us know what are the modifications that are being done to Tejas MK1 for performance improvement (AOA etc)ThanksSR

prasunThe russian Topol-M missile is capable of making evasive maneuvers to avoid a kill using terminal phase interceptors, and carries targeting countermeasures and decoys,It is also shielded against radiation, electromagnetic pulse, nuclear blasts, and is designed to survive a hit from any form of laser technology.does our current AGNI 1,2,and AGNI 3 has these technologies ?

prasun china has double digit GDP growth rate but we have only 6-7%GDP growth rate then why is the hype of major global economy that india is becoming our growth is low and china's economy is well establisher and has better growth than ours then why is the perception that china has a unstable economy where as though our economy is low than china and has less growth our economy is strong?

HI Prasun, would like your take on the Iraq war.what was the primary objective(not the military but strategic, certainly oil wasn't it?)now they have a Kurdistan as a carrot being dangled in front of Baghdad's face to make sure they behave

I think aerodynamically J-10 is probably up there with the eurofighter. Otherthan that it probably has much catching up to do, or Pak wouldn't be looking for a western radar package on it.Its a beauty to look at.

TO SU 30DONT GET ANGRY I AM NOT MARKETING BECAUSE WE NOT GONA SELL IT TO YOU.WELL TO MY KNOWLEDGE TEJAS WAS A COPY OF M21 BUT NOT A SUCCESSFULL COPY.I AGREE THAT J 10 MIGHT HAVE SOME REVERSE ENGINEERING DONE BUT STILL IT IS ONE OF THE BEST AVAILABLE

Dear Li Hung ,Yes J-10 is far better than JF-17,I think J-10 and the LCA is almost same , but IAF expecting more capable with less wt in LCA project , so far 40 nos is officialy orderd , i think more orders will come for mk2 version with new engine .but any way j-10 is good machine with 4+ tech.

in my view Eurofighter / mig35 is better than even f-18/ f-16 , as per AESA USA is matured in tech , the only negative in Typhoon tranche 3 is high $$

Interesting how a system that had a trouble free technical development is having problems at the user trials stage. At least some of these problems may be due to the fact that Agni-2 is insufficiently ruggedized compared to Agni-1 and Agni-3.

Incidentally, there have been 3 Agni-2 tests this year: May 19 which appears to have been a fairly comprehensive failure, June 19 which appears to have been fully successful (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200906191150dowjonesdjonline000715&title=india-conducts-second-ballistic-missile-test-in-a-month)and now this nocturnal test which appears to be a partial failure as several mission parameters were not met.

Suggest looking at these two articles for some insight into the mission objectives:

SBM , the problem seems to be with DRDO accepting that 3 Development test is enough for a BM to be fully operationally qualified system , 3 sucessful test is the only benchmark that DRDO adheres to religiously and then convinces the military to believe the same.

But there could be issues when the user trial takes place , there could be production related issue , something that is not taken into account.

It comes to stare when such user trials take place once in bluemoon.

Such failures are normal if one takes this as part of extended developmental effort , DRDO should conduct more test per missile including production/military testing and then rate these system as operational.

hey prasunda.how are u doing?///////actually prasunda you have already mentioned about the INDIAN ARMY's proactive strategy that envisages 8 integrated battle groups.what i wanted to kbnow was if u know where these IBGs would be stationed???????secondly i would like to ask about what will happen to the rest of the army formations.as u know in operation parakram the strike corps were away from the scene and the holding corps that were closer to the IB didnot have necessary supporting systems to enble them to carry on "offensive operations across the border".this was regarded as an impediment,especially for the 21st century battle that is heavily dependant on mobility.there were some solutions like providing the holding corps with enpough offensive capability for carrying out operations across the border.so has it happened??????secondly what are going to be the roles of the IBGs and if there are any plans for having more such BATTLE GROUPS.actually the concept of seperate holdinng corps and strike corps are in fact pretty outdated.so has there been any changes?????????THANK YOU.

Austin, 3 tests are adequate for an IOC. However, if the problem is, for example BDL QC, then DRDO can test DRDL produced systems ad infinitum and still not rectify these issues.

What is interesting is a quote from today's PTI report:

"Though the top brass of the Integrated Test Range (ITR) were tight-lipped about the outcome of the trial, a source said that at the time of the second stage separation, the missile appeared to have deviated from its coordinated path".

This seems to be indicative of a guidance problem. Combine this with Rout's report in May which seems to suggest a new guidance system is being tested and you may have the answer.

sbm, if 3 test is enough for IOC do this represents DRDO view or SFC view ?

It is possible that 3 test is good enough to prove that the design works and the system works as a whole , but not good enough to prove that the system is military/combat ready to go on alert combat as a matter of deterrence.

If 3 test is the bench mark for IOC then missile developers around the world would have applied the same benchmark , for eg Russia conducts atleast 6-8 test to prove the system and the military conducts equal amout of test to declare it initial combat ready

Computer simulation etc is even available to these countries and no one wants to spend resources to test for the sake of it.

The fact that A-2 test is going haywire in the test conducted by SFC proves that minimum test is not good enough for a system to be declared combat ready.

I've been thinking about the what the possible reason for a night-time test could be, and think I have an explanation.

The Agni-II is said to have a manoeuvring re-entry vehicle to enable relatively accurate strikes. This could be because the SFC is not fully confident of high-yield without full-up tests. [Ref your post on BR on Sept 24, 2008] The core of India's deterrent is likely to be the 25kT fission warhead, which according to you, can be scaled to about 60kT without causing any problems. But a small warhead would have to fall within a few metres of some targets to assure destruction - this is where the need for a precision strike comes in. The terminal guidance for the RV in this case could be some sort of optical system (a crude form of terrain matching, maybe? I don't know), whose performance would be affected by ambient light.

its amazing how bad india is at making weapons of any kind. Its a case of one bad story after another. Paks have managed to developed their shaheen missle system that is reliable and accurate...even though they got their initial breaks fron nk and chinese....but the end result is there for all to see.

read prasuns post on pak missiles... shaheen etc are all just chinese weapons manufactured in pak... not pak developed... and only god knows how accurate these are as both pak and chinese military is never transparent on their weapons tests the way IA and DRDO are.

well pakistan versus INDIA is going the US vrsus USSR way.actually behind all such nations who want to have a sufficiently strong armed force and increase their capabilities and power in the future lies the need of having finances.pakistan has gone bankrupt and its gdp is 1/10 ofINDIA'S ADD TO THAT INDIA'S BREEKNECK SPEED OF GROWTH AND U WOULD GET A 4TRILLION DOLLAR ECONOMY (THE SIZE OF TODAY'S CHINA AND JAPAN)BY 2020.WHILE SUCH DIZZYING HEIGHTS OF ECONOMIC CLOUT IS ONLY A PIPEDREAM FOR THE PAKISTANIS.THEREFORE THEY SHOULD FORGET ABOUT INDIA AND START BUILDING THEIR OWN NATION,WHICH WE ALL KNOW WONT HAPPEN.HENCE IN THE FUTURE WE WOULD SEE PAKISTANS POSTURE BEING RELEGATED TO THAT OF A DEFENSE VIS-A-VIS INDIA.HAVING SAID THAT THE MAIN CHALLENGE LIES IN CHINA WHO WOULD HAVE THE FINANCIL CLOUT A WELL AS POLITICAL PRO-ACTIVISM.THE ANSWER AS TO WHO EMERGES AS THE SUPERPOWER WILL LIE IN WHICH COUNTRY IS ABLE TO HAVE A BIGGER ECONOMY.

India being able to challenge china is a wet dream. when you travel in many parts of india they don't even speak or want to learn the national language. Whereas if you go the top schools in London, washington, guess what they are learning? its not hindi.....before i get attacked...look at india's birth rate versus its growth? look at its gdp per person versus pakistan. india has no industrial base to speak of...even the saris are being imported from china!!!!

sbm, with all due respect, prasun is the only one, amongst many who thinks paks have 12 nukes and that shaheens missiles system is from china. i respect his knowledge but let me tell you this no senior indian official thinks this!!! Can you tell which missiles correspond to shaheen II?

ps. the old hindu kings underestimated the rabble that is in pakistan now fighting with each other. Guess what happened? the rabble and their allies won and dominated for the next many centuries. Even today anything of important bears their name and origin.

India being able to challenge china is a wet dream. when you travel in many parts of india they don't even speak or want to learn the national language.

Like? So? Does that make a country get stunted?

Whereas if you go the top schools in London, washington, guess what they are learning? its not hindi.....

It's English, a language, by and large India is proficient in!

before i get attacked...look at india's birth rate versus its growth?

India's population growth rate is 1.34% per annum, while its GDP growth rate is between 8% and 9%. Thanks to the recent slump it dropped to around 6%, but you may still get the idea. Bow lets turn to Pakistan, which has an annual population growth rate of 2.18% versus a GDP growth rate of 2%!

look at its gdp per person versus pakistan.

A common misconception. It was the case 3 years ago that Pakistan's was higher but as of 2008 India's GDP Per Capita (PPP) was $2700 compared to $2600 for Pakistan.

india has no industrial base to speak of...even the saris are being imported from china!!!!

Ya so what about that? Most of the cheap Satin Saris come from China. Although there are some silk ones too, I have never come across any Chinese Silk Saris that come anywhere near Kanchiburam Silk Saris. India is a free economy, just like how you find Bibles printed in China! In Pakistan, even your islamic prayer mats (maybe even condoms) are from China. May even be used Chinese ones.

to anonymouswhat other anonymous meant was americans and british already know english and no need to learn what you already know.Question remains what language they are learning?i hope you are smarter then you

you are loosing your cool man, so easily, a man of confidence and knowledge should never do that. I am neither a pakistani nor an indian. But if i had to be born in either of the two, it would be Pakistan, their people have pride, and courage by the bucket loads.

Your comments say exactly what i was trying to convey, india cannot be compared to china, in anyway...even china of 1980's...but is comparable more to pakistan....which is exactly what you did in your reply.

It seems to me that pakistan is learning from the chinese...e.g. getting their help to setup production facilities and then improving on the products locally. whereas India is still importing tanks, planes, etc....on the other hand Pakistan is already looking to export? i completely agree that it is china that is helping them to get started...this is what USSr did to china in the 60 & 70's. my question was why can't india do the same? Lets go ahead in time to 2020, what do you think india will be producing? assembling russian planes, tanks, etc? what will pakistan be producing?

lol li hung / paki dumbass pretender... write after giving a thought using ur brain not ur arse... chinese so proud of their culture... how many wear chinese traditional clothes? indias prez wears indian traditional clothes. chinese and their melamine tainted milk, and cheap whores all over thailand.. no wonder u guys like pakis who are a breed of inbred donkeys.

pushing paki chinese dumbasses aside.. prasun, long time nothing heard from you. why is malaysia phasing out their Mig-29s, although they are rather new planes that are still in production / active service? and why is there much talk about that rather than the proposal to replace the Nuris which are more pressing at this point of time, since they are crashing all the time?

i would also like to point out that in the Star newspaper (KL Edition) i read about an enquiry into the DPM of Malaysia "illegally" using the Nuri helicopters to travel to some places in Sabah. If the Nuris are deemed so unsafe I wonder why would the DPM travel in one.

asking you as you're privy to affairs in this part of the world (which is your base)

The Master is away and someone let the dogs out or so it seems when Prasun is away and the blog is degenerating into insultanza (insult bonanza combined)without moderation.Please try and keep the discussions to enhance knowledge and share it instead of personal attacks.By acknowledgeing weakness no one would be un-patriotic because it takes guts to acknowledge mistakes and weakness to build in those areas and grow strong.Don't forget India by far was a third world country according to the west for years until the economic boom.China received 100% US support all along to counter the USSR.Pakistan as always lived off US aid and Chinese benevolence all in the name of political game.Tide has turned and what the Indian leadership is failing to realise is Chinese power did not happen overnight and going all alone.Whilst they "accepted their third world" status, they reversed all the western engineering,established industrial base on western money and learned what they needed to learn.With the Indian educated class this actually can happen a LOT faster - all that is needed is planning, coordination and leadership.

hahaha anon above those inbred donkeys may have had an influence on some indian languages but surely didnt change much.... we still hold on to our own religion, use our ancient scripts, wear our traditional clothes, even are named using traditional sanskrit names...

unlike Paki morons, who after the mughals came laid down EVERYTHING and lock-stock-barrel adopted the mughal way of life... just for lust of some worldly pleasures.. they renounced their millenia old religion, culture, even changed their language and their script and their names to follow the stupid arab inbred pigs!!

as for todays hindus in india, they fought to preserve their culture against the invaders by holding on to their traditions. Pakistanis proud people -- my FOOT.

next if USA conquers Pakistan (looks likely) you'll soon see pakis have Christian names, and change everything to suit US style. If they could have done it once in history (give up everything to follow their ruler), they'll do it twice.

common misconception that Pakis are Mughals who ruled Indian Subcontinent. Do a research and you'll find that Mughals are those who came from Central Asia, and amongst the lands they conquered was present day Pakistan, which was a set of thriving Hindu empires. However the mindless Paki dumbasses gave up their culture and traditions of thousands of years old to accept the way of life of some arab pedophiles... and after all that they proclaim themselves Mughals who ruled India. Pakis, you're not mughals / arabs. You're a bunch of scum who's neither here nor there

porki pigs wanna show their superiority and come up with bullshit that they RULED over india... hahahaha piece of crap. they were the most persecuted, but cheap bunch who converted to Islam so that their daughters can fill Mughal kings' Harem... cheap sluts..

actually i was speaking economics there its understandable if "anonymous" does not understand economics.however INDIA importing saris was news to me,in fact to all INDIANS.and the fact that INDIA does not have any industrial base is laughable to say the least,and shows how ignorant and arrogant ppl like anonymous can be.INDIA is dubbed to become the next "global manufacturing hub".well for all those people who feel "made in china" is a very big thing they should know made in china is basically "made in china by america"unlike INDIA.thirdly no INDIAN any wh\ere needs to learn hindi because they all know it courtesy BOLLYWOOD.EVEN IN INDIAN VILLAGES PEOPLE KNOW HINDI,AND U CAN TRUST ME MORE THAN UR ASS WHEN I SAY SO COZ I HAVE MY NATIVE PLACE IN A TOWN/VILLAGE.SO ANY NOTION THAT INDIA IS NOT UNITED IS JUST VERY DUMBASS LIKE.AND 1 MORE THING UNLIKE CHINA WHOSE GROWTH IS STATE SPONSORED INDIA'S GROWTH STORY HAS BEEN MADE SOLELY BY THE PRIVATE ENTREPRENEURS AND I AGREE WITHOUT PROPER INFRASTRUCTURE WE ARE GROWING AT 9 PERCENT U CAN JUST IMAGINE WHEN THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO GROW AT.CATUALLY IGNORANT PEOPLE LIKE U MAY NOT KNOW THAT THERE ARE MANY INDIANS WHO LIVE ON $1 PER DAY (THATS THE LEAST FIGURE) YET AFTER ALL THIS BOOM CHINA HAS GOT PEOPLE LIVING IN THE MAINLAND WITH INCOMES OF $0.36 PER DAY.

and the figures that i had spelt out are not INDIA made figures they are figures that were made by GOLDMAN SACHS.

what an ass hole.looK WHOEVER LI HUNG AND ANONYMOUS IS THERE ARE 2 KINDS OF INFRASTRUCTURE SOFT AND HARD CHINA IF U LOOK AT IT HAS GOT A CITY LIKE SHANGHAI PLUSH WITH SKYSCRAPERS AND SQUEAKY CLEAN ROADS.THERE ARE ALSO MANY BOOM TOWNS IN CHIJNA THAT HAVE MAGNIFICENT HARD INFRASTRUCTURE.NOW ITS NOT SURPRISING THAT CHINA HAS SUCH A WONDERFUL INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE REASON IS CHINA ADOPTED AN EXPORT LED GROWTH MODEL WHICH IS HEAVILY DEPENDANT ON INFRASTRUCTURE.

HOWEVER WHEN IT COMES TO KNOWLEDGE BASED ECONOMY INDIA IS LIGHT YEARS AHEAD OF CHINA.WHETHER ITS FINANCIAL WHETHER ITS MANAGEMENT WHETHER ITS IT/ITES WHETHER ITS HOSPITALITY OR WHATEVER.CHINA ENVIES INDIA.IN FACT INDIA IS INCREASINGLY BEING FAVOURED AS AN R&D HUB.THOUSANDS OF MULTINATIONALS HAVE SET UP THEIR LABORATORIES IN HERE AND MIND YOU THERE HAVE BEEN HUNDREDS WHO HAVE MADE INDIA THEIR FIRST OUTSIDE HOME LABORATORY.

AS FAR AS MANUFACTURING IS CONCERNED INDIA IS DOING GREAT.AND THERE IS SO MUCH TO PLAY FOR ESPECIALLY IF YOU ACCOUNT FOR THE INNOVATIONS THAT THE INDIAN MNCs are doing that are taking the poor in INDIA places by providing them cheap yet hi tech solutions/productsa.so theres a huge opportunity.people from foreign have already started calling INDIA a land of opportunity because it offers them a test bed where they can test their skills to innovate and prepare for the future.

I CAN UNDERSTAND WHEN PEOPLE DONT TALK ABOUT INDIA THEY ARE TOO OBSESSED WITH CHINA BUT THAT'S GOING TO COME TO A NOUGHT ONCE THESE THINGS START HAPPENING.

SO LIHUNG AND THE PAKI GUY NAMED ANONYMOUS WOULD DO WELLL TO LEARN THESE THINGS AND COME TO TALK BETTER STILL THEY SHOULD PLEASE NOT TALK ABOUT ECONOMICS.THEY KNOW VERY LITTLE ABOUT THINGS.

What????????I am no son of KHAN who ever that is???????i am just a plain speaking INDIAN.and whatever i have said is not lies or mere assumptions based on mutual cold feelings but the fact contrary to what u pakistani and chinese "copiers" do.

1. some dickheads like ahmeq quraishi and zaid hamid keep saying that pakis rules the indian subcontinent for several centuries. pakis are not mughals, but central asians. the difference is that indians stood up to them, while pakistanis gave in to their culture. but that doesnt make the pakis arabs / mughals.

2. yes, chinese economy is export oriented and depends so much on the US and EU. The US just imposed a relatively small tariff of Chinese tyres and several Chinese tyre manufacturers went bust! India's ban on several Chinese products also badly affected them. If tomorrow the US and EU ban Chinese goods, who's gonna be the bigger loser, China or these countries? It's not that US / EU cannot make clothes, batteries and toys. It's just because Chinese are cheaply available (also due to unreal Chinese policies in keeping the Yuan artificially low) that these countries are manufacturing in China. So it's all made in china by USA, EU, even India!. And 90% of Chinese exports, by value are from the license manufacture of foreign products. In India, 69% of exports are driven by local brands / manufacturers. In fact an international boycott on Indian goods won't hurt Indian manufacturers much as the bulk of their output is for local consumption, and will still be able to continue production for the domestic market, as India is a consumption driven economy (less dependent on others), unlike China's export driven economy.

When it comes to Pakistan, I don't know what to classify them. Maybe a beggar economy, dependent on aid from US, China, Saudi, Malaysia etc. Whatta shame, Pakistan's living on donation. And yet those beggars are ungrateful. USA is kind enough to pass a Kerry Lugar bill to help out the starving Pakistanis and Pakistan wants amendments. All praises to Hillary Clintons offer: take it or leave it. Beggars can't choose!

Hi all, Prasun has been arrested by the Chennai police as he sodomized Ajai Shukla last week. He'll be remanded till his bail hearing next week, and hopefully he'll reply should he be granted bail. I met Prasun today in prison and he asked me not to let anyone know, but I decided to blow the whistle as he sodomized my boyfriend Ajai.

@lihung, we come here mainly to ask prasun questions, as he's got in depth knowledge about the indian and south east asian defense scene. as such with him not here, there's not much of a discussion that can be made.

well even america imports chinese substandard clothes, wires, switches etc when they are making stealthy fighters and nuclear aircraft carriers. Its because all these wires are actually Made by America in China because of the cheap Chinese willingness to slog to produce goods for the world. Sadly we should have known of the saying; "you throw peanuts, you get monkeys". a cognate should be "you throw pittance, you get Chinese".

i dont really think this asshole also named as li hung is a chinese he is actually a pakistani disguising himself a a chinese.what a shame,they are ashamed of pronouncing their nationality. and tis very guy,its quite amazing,wanted us to believe we are not united.

yes, no doubt about that...from his above comments we know that... he says porkistanis are proud people, ruled over indians etc...most chinks wouldnt even care too hoots... this porki bastard knows any mention of porkistan here will get a befitting reply... like given above which he cant rebutt. filthy porkis know they are no match against india economically, socially, politically, technologically and militarily so they assume a double role. bring in china's name to lobby porkistan. shameless inbred cowards.

oh really? did he mention 'pakistanis ruled over INDIA'WELL I THINK THAT WOULD REALLY NAIL HIS LIE COZ I HAD READ SOMEWHERE THAT THE PAKISTANI GOV/MILITARY LEADERS TO WHIP UP ANTI-INDIA SENTIMENTS TEACHES THE ASSHOLES, ALSO NAMED AS PAKISTANIS,THAT ONCE PAKISTAN HAD RULED OVER INDIA AND OTHER SUCH LAUGHABLE THINGS.